The parents of a child with a rare brain condition requiring ongoing care say they would have terminated the pregnancy had they known of abnormalities they claim should have been evident during routine prenatal assessments.
That’s the premise behind an $89.5 million lawsuit filed earlier this year against Guelph General Hospital and Guelph Medical Imaging, as well as other medical service providers
“As a result of the defendants’ negligence, breach of contract, lack of informed consent, negligent misrepresentation, negligent misstatement and/or breach of fiduciary duty, the plaintiffs have suffered significant damages and psychological injury, the extent of which is not yet known at this time,” the lawsuit states.
“The plaintiffs plead that had they been properly informed, and received proper investigation, diagnosis, treatment, care, advice and representation by the defendants, the plaintiffs would have chosen to electively terminate the pregnancy prior to (the child’s birth).”
Alternatively, the family claims it would not have consented to life-saving measures following birth and the child would have “passed away naturally.”
None of the allegations have been tested or proven in court. At this time, no statements of defence have been filed.
A GGH spokesperson declined to comment on the allegations, as is the hospital’s general practice for ongoing litigation.
A manager at Guelph Medical Imaging declined to comment for this article.
As outlined in the statement of claim, the couple became pregnant in July of 2019. They participated in several rounds of prenatal assessments and diagnostic imaging throughout the pregnancy, all of which allegedly failed to detect abnormalities in the fetus.
That December, the couple travelled to China to visit family. While there, an ultrasound was performed that also indicated no abnormalities, but the couple returned home with concerns nonetheless.
In early February of 2020, the couple met with its doctor to discuss the Shanghai test results and request follow-up assessment. During the meeting, the lawsuit claims, the couple expressed its desire to terminate the pregnancy if fetal brain anomalies were confirmed.
Later that month the expectant mother visited the GGH emergency department with lower abdominal pain and blood spotting but testing showed “no evidence of hydrocephalus” was found.
The child was born on March 18, 2020, without vital signs and didn’t respond to stimulation but was resuscitated and admitted to the special care nursery. They were discharged from the nursery on March 21.
A paediatric MRI conducted the following January led to a Joubert Syndrome diagnosis.
“As a result of the aforementioned conduct, negligence and breaches, the plaintiffs … have incurred and will continue to incur in the future damages for the care of (the child) including special damages including but not limited to nanny accounts, personal support worker accounts, physiotherapy accounts, speech-language pathology accounts, therapy accounts, hospital accounts, doctors’ accounts, drugs, medical treatment and medication, household services, counselling fees, transportation, lost income, personal effects and other related expenses, the full particulars of which will be provided to the defendants during the course of these proceedings,” the lawsuit reads.
“(The family’s) enjoyment and quality of life has been permanently affected by the aforementioned conduct, negligence and breaches of the defendants. They have also lost income and have been competitively disadvantaged in the employment field as a result.”
